Three investigators with the National Transportation Safety Board are in Coolidge hoping to determine what caused a 30-inch El Paso Natural Gas pipeline to explode earlier this week, killing two members of a family and critically injuring a third.
Rosalita Alvarez remains hospitalized in Phoenix after suffering severe burns in a house fire which ignited shortly after 5:30 a.m. last Sunday. Her husband Luiz and their daughter Valeria, 14, died inside the house, according to the Pinal County Sheriff’s Office.
Authorities believe the fire was triggered by the explosion of the Kinder Morgan-owned pipeline. The ruptured portion of the pipeline is located about one football field’s distance from the Alvarez home, which was destroyed in the blaze.
According to Peter Knudson of the NTSB, the agency’s investigators arrived Monday and are expected to remain in the area for a few more days as they search for the probable cause of the explosion and fire. They are also looking for any contributing factors.
The NTSB is joined in the investigation by the Arizona Corporation Commission, the U.S. Department of Transportation’s Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration, and Kinder Morgan. The Pinal County Sheriff’s Office and the Coolidge Police Department are also involved due to the fatalities.
Knudson told AZ Free News on Thursday that a preliminary report will be posted to the NTSB website in mid-September. However, a final report about the tragedy could take 12 to 24 months to complete.
In a statement released by Kinder Morgan shortly after the incident, the company said it experienced “a pipeline failure” but that the impacted pipeline segment was isolated. It took emergency responders until nearly 8 a.m. to shut off the flow of gas to the area, the Coolidge Fire Department reported.
Coolidge residents miles away from the pipeline reported hearing and feeling the explosion Sunday morning, and a large fireball was visible for miles, including in Casa Grande.
The NTSB is an independent federal agency responsible for determining the probable cause for pipeline incidents, as well as civil aviation, railroad, highway, and marine accidents.
By Arizona Corporation Commissioner Justin Olson |
On Wednesday, the Corporation Commission disregarded the clear will of the voters and advanced energy mandates nearly identical to what the voters overwhelmingly rejected just over two years ago. With 68.2% voting no, Arizonans resoundingly defeated Proposition 127 that would have required Arizona’s utilities to obtain 50% of their power from renewable sources. Voters sent a clear message that they do not support arbitrary mandates that will drive up the cost of their energy bills .
While Proposition 127 was a 50% renewable energy mandate by 2030, the draft energy rules adopted by the Commission yesterday include a 50% carbon emissions reduction mandate by 2032. But that’s not all, the Commission’s rule goes far beyond Prop-127’s 50% threshold and requires a 100% ban on carbon emissions by 2070.
Two years ago, California adopted a similar 100% standard and the result has been disastrous. Californians pay 50% more for their power than Arizonans, and, what do they get for this premium—rolling blackouts. In the heat of the summer last year, Californians found themselves with no ability to turn on their air conditioning units, power their appliances or even have a light to read. There was not enough power to go around due to California’s failed policies. Why would Arizona adopt the same mandates that led to these miserable results?
During the Commission’s deliberations, I offered an amendment to the energy rules that would have honored the will of the voters and protected ratepayers. With my amendment, the mandates would only apply if the projects available to meet the carbon reduction thresholds were the lowest-cost method of meeting customers’ energy needs. Unfortunately, the Commission rejected this commonsense amendment and made it clear that these rules are designed to drive up costs to ratepayers.
When I ran for the Commission, I promised to pursue policies that will lead to the lowest rates possible while still maintaining safe and reliable services. I have sought to honor this pledge with each of my votes at the Commission and my vote yesterday was no exception. I proudly voted to respect the will of the voters and to protect the ratepayers from unwanted rate increases. It’s disappointing that a majority of the Commission did not do the same.
Justin Olson says news reports that he is against getting Arizona’s electric utilities to a carbon-free or net-zero carbon level are incorrect. He whole-heartedly supports that goal, Olson insists, but believes it is more important to ensure Arizonans who pay for that electricity do not end up paying higher rates to reach the goal.
Olson is one of five members of the Arizona Corporation Commission, and one of three Republicans. He was joined last Wednesday by the ACC’s two Democrats in voting down a rules package which urged all electric utilities to a net-zero carbon level by 2050, but not mandate the goal.
The vote came nearly six months after the ACC -with a slightly different contingent of commissioners- voted 4 to 1 on a draft set of rules that included the net-zero by 2050 mandate. It had taken ACC staff and industry representatives about three years to get those rules worked out.
Olson cast the lone nay in that November vote. And he then voted nay last week even after he introduced an amendment to make the whole thing more palatable by switching the mandates to guidelines.
In the end, Olson says he could not get language into the rules to prevent utilities from using the mandates -or guidelines- as a justification for a rate increase to pay for something the company intended to do anyway. And that left customers at risk of paying more.
Olson insists that complaints directed toward any commissioners for “wasting” the time of ACC and industry staff are misplaced.
“The utilities would have undertaken all of that review and study anyway,” as part of determining their own future business plans, Olson told AZ Free News.
In fact, Arizona Public Service (APS) released an Integrated Resource Plan update for shareholders in February which listed its clean energy commitment for 100 percent “clean, carbon-free electricity” by 2050. Olson noted that the company’s plan was made without any regulatory mandate in place.
Olson also pointed out the “overwhelming” voter rejection of Proposition 127 in 2018 which sought to amend the Arizona Constitution to require nongovernmental electric utilities to increase the portion of their retail energy sales from certain types of renewable energy resources to 50 percent by 2030.
Refusing to support any type of renewable energy mandate without protecting ratepayers was simply “respecting the will of the voters,” says Olson. And that, he believes, means the ACC should be working to ensure ratepayers are charged lower rates in the future if utility companies benefit from lower costs by their own business decisions to use more renewable sources.
Some opponents of Olson’s position worry the Biden Administration will push Congress to pass legislation which may set net-zero mandates that do not serve the interest of Arizona’s utilities or its electricity users.
Olson says he understand that concern, but to preemptively enact “a bad policy” would be irresponsible given “there is no harm or penalty to Arizona the utilities, or the ratepayers at this time.”
A State House committee was forced to postpone Tuesday’s discussion of a bill about who has authority to set energy policy in Arizona after almost all House Democrats failed to show up for a floor session earlier in the day at which the bill was to get its First Read.
The Committee on Natural Resources, Energy & Water (NREW) was to meet at 2 p.m. to consider HB2248, which seeks to rein in the Arizona Corporation Commission (ACC) regulation of critical electric generation resources. However, the bill had to be dropped from the committee’s agenda when the required First Read was not conducted at 1:15 p.m. because only 28 of 60 House members showed up for the floor session.
House members are split 31 Republicans and 29 Democrats. Public records reveal an overwhelming majority of those not present for Tuesday’s floor session were Democrats.
HB2248 sponsored by Rep. Gail Griffin (R-LD14) is in response to various Green New Deal mandates implemented by the ACC in recent years for how public service corporations can do business. It makes clear that legislators -not the ACC’s five members- have authority for establishing policies related to critical electric generation resources, whether biomass, coal, fuel-cell technology, geothermal, hydroelectric, natural gas, nuclear, solar, wind, or petroleum fuel products.
HB2248 would prohibit the ACC from adopting or enforcing any “policy, decision or rule” which directly or indirectly regulates what types of critical electric generation resources to be used or acquired by a public service corporation within Arizona’s energy grid “without express legislative authorization.”
The bill’s First Read was finally conducted Wednesday afternoon, according to House spokesman Andrew Wilder. It will go back to the NREW committee which Griffin chairs, but not until Jan. 26 at the earliest. The last day for the House to consider the bill is Feb. 18.
Sen. Sine Kerr (R-LD13) has introduced SB1175, a companion bill to HB2248. The bills would amend Title 40 of the Arizona Revised Statute by adding a new section designated as ARS §40-213. The amendment would not apply to any ACC policy, decision, or rule adopted before June 30, 2020 but would be retroactive to that date if passed.
Griffin and Kerr’s bills are supported by the Barry Goldwater Institute for Public Policy Research, the Free Enterprise Club, the Market Freedom Alliance, the Americans For Prosperity-AZ, and the Republican Liberty Caucus of Arizona.
